Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	brother_n	danger_n	fool_n	1,488	5	9.9269	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65846	A serious exhortation to an holy life, or, A plea for the absolute necessity of inherent righteousness in those that hope to be saved by Tho. Wadsworth.	Wadsworth, Thomas, 1630-1676.	1660 (1660)	Wing W190; ESTC R23587	25,975	74

among the spirits of just men made perfect if thou resolvest to seek after it which through the grace of God thou mayest assuredly attain to Second Part shewing what is the righteousness of the Saints that exceeds that of the Pharisees 1 THe Pharisees as righteous as they were did not acknowledge Jesus Christ nor entertain him as the Son of God and the Saviour of the world Now if thou wilt acknowledge him as all this and answerably resolve to beleeve in him relye upon him for pardon and strength against sin if thou wilt love him above thy father mother son daughter house land living above thy sins and lusts and wilt readily part with them all at his command thou hast done something the Pharisees never did thy righteousness shall bee more than theirs and thou shalt enter into heaven when they shall bee shut down into hell 2 The Pharisees beleeved it a sin to commit Murder but they did not count it murder to bee angry with their brethren or neighbours without a cause and to call them Fools or Racha Now Reader if thou wilt strive and struggle all revenge and unlawful passion out of thy heart thou art more righteous than ever the Pharisees were Reader see thou to it it must bee done without thou wilt bee content to bee no more righteous than the Pharisees were do not dispute it Christ will have it so Matth. 5.22 I say unto you that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall bee in danger of Judgement and whosoever shall say Thou Fool shall bee in danger of Hell fire If thou wilt have it more clear consider 1 Joh. 3.15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer and yee know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him As thou likest the casting into hell fire or being accounted a murderer in the judgement of God of being void of eternal life give way hereafter to thy proud peevish revengeful passionate nature 3 The righteousness of the Pharisees condemned the act of Adultery to bee a sin but they did not think that a lascivious look and a lustful defire of the heart after a woman was a sin Now Reader if thou wilt resolve to conquer the desires of thy lustful eyes and heart thou hast attained a righteousness the Pharisees never had stick not at it sinner this Command as the whole yoak of Christ is easie and may bee born Christ will have it and thou must do it if thou resolvest to exceed the Pharisees Mat. 5.28 I say unto you sayes Christ whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed Adultery already with her in his heart Now think if thou wilt still give way to thy lustful eyes and heart know this that the Adulterer God will judge and thou mayest bee such though thounever dost commit the act 4 The Pharisees thought it onely a sin to forswear themselves but the Command of Christ is Swear not at all Mat. 5.34 except it bee in cases that are true certain and certainly known lawful possible and weighty wherein the glory of God and the welfare of thy neighbour is considerably concerned but ordinarily before a Magistrate and then an oath is lawful This I must prove because it is so stifly denied by some in this age inconsiderately enough The onely Objection which they have is founded on that of our Lord Christs Matth. 5.34 But I say unto you swear not at all which saying I confess if broken off from the scope of Christ in his whole discourse seems to intimate so much that it was not onely the corrupt prophane use of Oaths that hee condemneth but that hee intended an utter abolition of the use of all how ever circumstantiated Ans 1 I grant that from this Text not only perjury but that swearing is forbidden 2 I farther grant that all manner of swearing by any creature is expresly forbidden as by Heaven Earth Jerusalem by thy head and that in no case what ever is it lawful to use them and the Lord Christ gives you the reason why But 3 I deny that from this Text may bee proved that it is unlawful to swear by God himself before a Magistrate or in the cases above expressed My reasons are these 1 Because the Lord Christ doth not mention that oath which was onely lawful amongst the Jews but takes up in chiding them for perjury in general and for oaths by creatures in particular which Hierom noted long since Considero inquit quod hic Salvator non per Deum jurare prohibuerit sed per Caelum per terram c. 2 Because the God and Father of our Lord Jesus did constitute the lawfulness of swearing by his Name Deut. 6.6.13 and 10.20 Thou shalt swear by the Name of God Exod. 22.1 The oath of Jehovah shall bee between you Now is it probable that the Son should make that unlawful which the Father made lawful Is not this to establish the old Manichaean heresie That taught that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New were as contrary as light and darkness and their work was to contradict each other If any reply that it is a granted case that Christ abolished the Cer●monial Law that under the Mosaical dispensation was in force at the appointment of his Father and why may hee not then abolish this I answer But then it must bee well proved that an oath was a ceremony and then I pray tell mee what it was a type of But secondly I have far more ground to think it one of the Judicial Laws as being highly subservient to put the other Laws in execution which in many cases might have been suspended or not with so clear justice executed without an Oath to render the testimony evident 3 Because hee expresly sayes of himself I came not to dest roy the Law but to fulfil it and can you perswade your self that hee can say hee will not and yet o it was not there once a Law for swearing have I not proved it But can Christ bee said to fulfil that Law by an utter abolishing of it he being the Substance came in the room of all the Ceremonies which were shadows but prove that an Oath is a shadow and I have done 4 I argue à genere from the nature of an Oath it self which if well understood it is very unlikely that the Son of God should take away the use of it An Oath is an appeal to God wherein hee is beseeched as the onely searcher of hearts that hee would bear testimony to the truth and would punish the swearer if hee know him to bear a false testimony but that all such appeals to God should bee prohibited and condemned by Christ can hardly bee affirmed without blasphemy 5 Let mee reason from the end and use of an Oath which will farther discover it was never the intent of Christ utterly to abolish all oathes 1 An Oath then is that whereby men give to God the praise